ASF
28-04-2004, 12:27 PM
Cabinet gets announced today. Will we see a real commitment to delivery or not? From my point of interest if Dr Ivy stays it will send me a clear message. I hope she get's the boot - not holding my breath though....
View Full Version : Will she stay or will she go?
martin
28-04-2004, 05:34 PM
No surprises, she's still there...
rpm
28-04-2004, 06:51 PM
I was also waiting in anticipation to see if anything will change…I held my breath…should have followed ASF’s advice :)
RPM
rpm@myadsl.co.za
RPM
rpm@myadsl.co.za
BTTB
28-04-2004, 08:53 PM
Oh well looks like we will have to make do. Perhaps she has good advisors. I see she is a doctor. Doctor in what might I ask.
<b><hr noshade size="1"></b><font size="2"><font color="red"><b>You can take Telkom out of the Post Office but you can't take the Post Office out of Telkom.</b></font id="red"></font id="size2">
<b><hr noshade size="1"></b><font size="2"><font color="red"><b>You can take Telkom out of the Post Office but you can't take the Post Office out of Telkom.</b></font id="red"></font id="size2">
quik
28-04-2004, 09:28 PM
Probably a doctorate in some BA. field...
<font color="green">Video didn't kill the radio star...</font id="green"> <font color="red">Telkom did</font id="red">
<font color="green">Video didn't kill the radio star...</font id="green"> <font color="red">Telkom did</font id="red">
BTTB
28-04-2004, 10:22 PM
I like to refer to a BA (bachelor of Arts) as <b>B</b>ugger <b>A</b>ll.
As without any other further diploma or degree it is precisely that.
<b><hr noshade size="1"></b><font size="2"><font color="red"><b>You can take Telkom out of the Post Office but you can't take the Post Office out of Telkom.</b></font id="red"></font id="size2">
As without any other further diploma or degree it is precisely that.
<b><hr noshade size="1"></b><font size="2"><font color="red"><b>You can take Telkom out of the Post Office but you can't take the Post Office out of Telkom.</b></font id="red"></font id="size2">
mbs
28-04-2004, 10:36 PM
Don't be nasty, guys. She's an educator by profession, with her PH.D from somewhere in America. Believe it or not, she also spent some time in Canada, apparently - wonder if she subscribes in any way to the misplaced views of JERREK?! LOL...
Be all that as it may, I think her head's screwed on right, and she now has a deputy to help - somebody by the name of R Padayachee. Don't know of him at all, but hopefully she can now really start delivering in a big way, instead of having to negotiate around all the obstacles, hindrances and politics thrown in her way (not least by arrogant overseas players determined to make us an economic colony). As evidence for why I say her head's screwed on right, here's an extract from an interview she gave at the World Summit on the Information Society - Geneva 10-12 December 2003:
<b><i>South Africa’s Minister of Communications Tells TerraViva Her Country Will Not Wait for the Global Community to Take Action on ICTs</b></i>
<b>It was announced this week that a year-long study will be conducted into Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade’s proposal for a digital fund to help developing nations bridge the ICT divide. Do you think such a fund is critically important?</b>
<i>I’m not going to wait in South Africa for somebody to come and give us money — we just have to make do with whatever we have. But, it’s not an answer that everybody can give. It’s a very different answer from somebody who would come from Mali. Many of these countries (developing states) are countries, as one of the ministers said, whose monies have been taken, and are kept in European or American banks. And therefore, when people are emotional about that, it’s because there is a good cause. I think different countries need different kinds and levels of assistance.</i>
<b>Let’s talk about NEPAD (the New Partnership for Africa’s Development). The initiative has put a priority on getting the infrastructure in place that is needed to give Africans access to ICTs. Has all this talk resulted in any projects?</b>
<i>We have asked our own South African company to see what it can do with other countries in terms of electricity roll-out. We have asked for a study to see the viability of the Congo River and its hydro-electric capacity, because we recognise that that is going to be an important part of infrastructure roll-out. Because, you can have all the communications infrastructure you want, but it won’t really work unless you also have the energy.
We have already talked about an under-sea cable on the east coast, and people have been working together — both governments and business — in terms of the extension of the cable. You just have to say: what is it that you can do, working together as business — as governments — to bring these things together? And, international financiers or whoever wants the business, will participate where they see interest for themselves.</i>
<b>A lot has been said at this conference about languages that are used on the Internet, and the fact that some do not have a presence on the web. South Africa is funding a portal where all of the country’s eleven official languages can be read (sedibafountain.org.za.) How did this come about?</b>
<i>It’s actually an initiative by young people at the National Electronic Media Institute of South Africa, NEMISA. One of the difficulties with access is that it’s not just having a physical point to connect to. It is also the language of access, the content. You can go to a place, but if everything is in English — does it help you? So, a South African would find their language on the site. They would find content that is relevant for them, and their own life experience.
And for us as government, if we are to deliver services, then this site is going to be important too, so that people would know what services government offers, to whom and where. People were quite amazed at the number of hits on the site.</i>
<b>Looking at the other issues raised by WSIS — which do you feel are the most important?</b>
</i>Well, issues around security of information and the networks. The issues around ICANN, I think, were very important for us.[/i]
<b>What are your views on the debate around ICANN’s continued management of domain names?</b>
<i>At the moment, the Internet is governed by laws specific to one country (even) one state, in one particular country. And, it doesn’t really allow for participation of other people. Like all things which start in a particular place, it is shaped by a particular culture.
I think what people are saying is that the way the Internet is governed should not be subject to the law of one state. Because should there be conflict, a developing country like Bangladesh would have to sue in the courts of the United States. I mean, really! Give us a break.[/i]
Be all that as it may, I think her head's screwed on right, and she now has a deputy to help - somebody by the name of R Padayachee. Don't know of him at all, but hopefully she can now really start delivering in a big way, instead of having to negotiate around all the obstacles, hindrances and politics thrown in her way (not least by arrogant overseas players determined to make us an economic colony). As evidence for why I say her head's screwed on right, here's an extract from an interview she gave at the World Summit on the Information Society - Geneva 10-12 December 2003:
<b><i>South Africa’s Minister of Communications Tells TerraViva Her Country Will Not Wait for the Global Community to Take Action on ICTs</b></i>
<b>It was announced this week that a year-long study will be conducted into Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade’s proposal for a digital fund to help developing nations bridge the ICT divide. Do you think such a fund is critically important?</b>
<i>I’m not going to wait in South Africa for somebody to come and give us money — we just have to make do with whatever we have. But, it’s not an answer that everybody can give. It’s a very different answer from somebody who would come from Mali. Many of these countries (developing states) are countries, as one of the ministers said, whose monies have been taken, and are kept in European or American banks. And therefore, when people are emotional about that, it’s because there is a good cause. I think different countries need different kinds and levels of assistance.</i>
<b>Let’s talk about NEPAD (the New Partnership for Africa’s Development). The initiative has put a priority on getting the infrastructure in place that is needed to give Africans access to ICTs. Has all this talk resulted in any projects?</b>
<i>We have asked our own South African company to see what it can do with other countries in terms of electricity roll-out. We have asked for a study to see the viability of the Congo River and its hydro-electric capacity, because we recognise that that is going to be an important part of infrastructure roll-out. Because, you can have all the communications infrastructure you want, but it won’t really work unless you also have the energy.
We have already talked about an under-sea cable on the east coast, and people have been working together — both governments and business — in terms of the extension of the cable. You just have to say: what is it that you can do, working together as business — as governments — to bring these things together? And, international financiers or whoever wants the business, will participate where they see interest for themselves.</i>
<b>A lot has been said at this conference about languages that are used on the Internet, and the fact that some do not have a presence on the web. South Africa is funding a portal where all of the country’s eleven official languages can be read (sedibafountain.org.za.) How did this come about?</b>
<i>It’s actually an initiative by young people at the National Electronic Media Institute of South Africa, NEMISA. One of the difficulties with access is that it’s not just having a physical point to connect to. It is also the language of access, the content. You can go to a place, but if everything is in English — does it help you? So, a South African would find their language on the site. They would find content that is relevant for them, and their own life experience.
And for us as government, if we are to deliver services, then this site is going to be important too, so that people would know what services government offers, to whom and where. People were quite amazed at the number of hits on the site.</i>
<b>Looking at the other issues raised by WSIS — which do you feel are the most important?</b>
</i>Well, issues around security of information and the networks. The issues around ICANN, I think, were very important for us.[/i]
<b>What are your views on the debate around ICANN’s continued management of domain names?</b>
<i>At the moment, the Internet is governed by laws specific to one country (even) one state, in one particular country. And, it doesn’t really allow for participation of other people. Like all things which start in a particular place, it is shaped by a particular culture.
I think what people are saying is that the way the Internet is governed should not be subject to the law of one state. Because should there be conflict, a developing country like Bangladesh would have to sue in the courts of the United States. I mean, really! Give us a break.[/i]
ASF
29-04-2004, 02:20 PM
Talk is cheap!
I take performance as an indicator. Using this measuring rod she's absolutely useless!
I for one don't believe that a 67 year old, self confessed technophobe should hold the keys to the office of the Ministry of Telecommunications.
The woman is a bungling idiot! Fancy sound bites - prepared by some consultant mean zip, nada, f*kol!
Action and progress in the right direction is what is needed.
I suggest that we lobby the DA again on what they, as the official opposition (although small), intend to do about the damn situation. And no it's not a political thing - when we last had communications with the DA on this issue sometime last year it was clear that they had a clear progressive stance on the issue - and at least they had an inkling of the issues and the importance of a deregulated telco market....
I take performance as an indicator. Using this measuring rod she's absolutely useless!
I for one don't believe that a 67 year old, self confessed technophobe should hold the keys to the office of the Ministry of Telecommunications.
The woman is a bungling idiot! Fancy sound bites - prepared by some consultant mean zip, nada, f*kol!
Action and progress in the right direction is what is needed.
I suggest that we lobby the DA again on what they, as the official opposition (although small), intend to do about the damn situation. And no it's not a political thing - when we last had communications with the DA on this issue sometime last year it was clear that they had a clear progressive stance on the issue - and at least they had an inkling of the issues and the importance of a deregulated telco market....
martin
29-04-2004, 02:43 PM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by ASF</i>
<br />Talk is cheap!
I take performance as an indicator. Using this measuring rod she's absolutely useless!
I for one don't believe that a 67 year old, self confessed technophobe should hold the keys to the office of the Ministry of Telecommunications.
The woman is a bungling idiot! Fancy sound bites - prepared by some consultant mean zip, nada, f*kol!
Action and progress in the right direction is what is needed.
I suggest that we lobby the DA again on what they, as the official opposition (although small), intend to do about the damn situation. And no it's not a political thing - when we last had communications with the DA on this issue sometime last year it was clear that they had a clear progressive stance on the issue - and at least they had an inkling of the issues and the importance of a deregulated telco market....
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Agreed.
<br />Talk is cheap!
I take performance as an indicator. Using this measuring rod she's absolutely useless!
I for one don't believe that a 67 year old, self confessed technophobe should hold the keys to the office of the Ministry of Telecommunications.
The woman is a bungling idiot! Fancy sound bites - prepared by some consultant mean zip, nada, f*kol!
Action and progress in the right direction is what is needed.
I suggest that we lobby the DA again on what they, as the official opposition (although small), intend to do about the damn situation. And no it's not a political thing - when we last had communications with the DA on this issue sometime last year it was clear that they had a clear progressive stance on the issue - and at least they had an inkling of the issues and the importance of a deregulated telco market....
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Agreed.
lewstherin
29-04-2004, 04:19 PM
Well all I know is that I'm not planning on hanging around to see if Ivy will do better. I already know what the next 5 years will hold - and broadband ain't it. I'm bailing this backward country as soon as I get a chance, and I'm taking my MSc with me - screw the ANC and their moronic cabinet.
<font color="blue">Telkom needs a leash, ICASA needs some guts, and the </font id="blue"><font color="red">SA consumer</font id="red"><font color="blue"> needs to make it happen</font id="blue">
<font color="blue">Telkom needs a leash, ICASA needs some guts, and the </font id="blue"><font color="red">SA consumer</font id="red"><font color="blue"> needs to make it happen</font id="blue">
ASF
29-04-2004, 04:39 PM
Check out http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/telecoms/2004/0404291200.asp?A=ITG&S=IT%20in%20Government&O=E&CiRestriction=
Well I disagree...
CUASA and SAVA should stop skirting around the issue and show they have some balls...
She's useless and shouldn't have been given another term to add to her list of monumental screwup's...
Well I disagree...
CUASA and SAVA should stop skirting around the issue and show they have some balls...
She's useless and shouldn't have been given another term to add to her list of monumental screwup's...
caroper
29-04-2004, 07:35 PM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">We believe that continuity is very important in this industry, so keeping the same minister is important<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Who is this fool?[:(!]
Continuity is what we need to avoid in this industry.
Continuity is stagnation, this is a vibrant ever changing field.
Is he a volunteer or is CUASA another gravy train?[V]
Cheers
Chris
Who is this fool?[:(!]
Continuity is what we need to avoid in this industry.
Continuity is stagnation, this is a vibrant ever changing field.
Is he a volunteer or is CUASA another gravy train?[V]
Cheers
Chris
mbs
30-04-2004, 01:12 AM
I urge you all to take a more cooperative stance on the approach to our problem - adopting an agressive attitude and personal attacks on the Minister or organised business will get us nowhere. As I've said elsewhere in this forum, she's not the problem, nor is Government, nor political parties - I now include organised business forums in this list. The problem lies with policy execution and service delivery, compounded by the intricacies and complexity of the telecomms environment, and the non-inclusive self-interest of certain players. I would like to think that the latter definition does not include the MyADSL forum - instead, our approach should be characterised by cooperation and specific focus on rectifying problems with the service, whether it be regulatory, technical, administrative, and so on. To my way of thinking, all problems to date can be traced back to the arrogance and actions of Telkom, and our attentions must continue to be focussed there. If there is any question of underperformance, bungling, idiocy, vapid talk, useless and moronic approaches, etc., you need look no further than Telcrap. And I say once again, I believe the way to solve the problem is to continue to make representations to Government and its Regulator, to haul them over the coals - taking it to the extreme, fire the asses of their strategic and operational decision-makers! There are some very influential people in the VANS and User forums, who may have the ear of Government and a direct line to the various oversight committees that affect telecomms in SA - it makes sense to rather rope them in, as opposed to being adversarial...
microfast
30-04-2004, 08:57 AM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mbs</i>
.... the approach to our problem - <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
At least it is agreed that there is a problem.
I suggest that your proposals don't address the problem :
you wrote :
"<i><font color="blue">...The problem lies with policy execution and service delivery, ....</font id="blue"></i>"
It is the policy which is the problem and it is policy which makes satisfactory execution and service delivery improbable.
I suggest that "policy" lies fairly and squarely with the Minister and therefore
the minister must be held accountable for the poor service delivery that exists in SA today.
.... the approach to our problem - <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
At least it is agreed that there is a problem.
I suggest that your proposals don't address the problem :
you wrote :
"<i><font color="blue">...The problem lies with policy execution and service delivery, ....</font id="blue"></i>"
It is the policy which is the problem and it is policy which makes satisfactory execution and service delivery improbable.
I suggest that "policy" lies fairly and squarely with the Minister and therefore
the minister must be held accountable for the poor service delivery that exists in SA today.
mbs
30-04-2004, 10:07 AM
You'll have to be more specific, MICROFAST - precisely what aspects of our telecomms policy are problematic, in your opinion? The way I see it, besides actual execution and service delivery (the blame for which lies squarely at Telkom's door), that which is a problem is actually the policy mechanism itself, which takes *just too long*. If this weren't the case, we would've had the removal of Section 40 of the TCA a long time ago, as well as finality on the Convergence Bill, which now has to be revisited due to the pace of technology change...
microfast
30-04-2004, 11:32 AM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mbs</i>
....precisely what aspects of our telecomms policy are problematic<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I mention just one problem - by way of an example.
<font color="navy">I want a two-way satellite link, the radio spectrum is proven, it is available and legal - </font id="navy">
but "policy" prevents me from getting it.
"Policy" allows me to have it, but then shuts me out by charging an annual "license fee" of R50 000.00 (ICASA).
So technologically - no problem, economically - Oh no, we can't have an individual with this capability.
Imagine if every school, community, individual, business and so on could have their own direct two-way satellite link what fantastic impact this would have on our economy.
There are ever increasing satellites above our skies - easily accessible with unlimited bandwidth at incredible prices.
All I want is for policy to change the license fee from R50 000.00 to R50.00.
The minister could do this with the stroke of a pen and solve many of our problems.
....precisely what aspects of our telecomms policy are problematic<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I mention just one problem - by way of an example.
<font color="navy">I want a two-way satellite link, the radio spectrum is proven, it is available and legal - </font id="navy">
but "policy" prevents me from getting it.
"Policy" allows me to have it, but then shuts me out by charging an annual "license fee" of R50 000.00 (ICASA).
So technologically - no problem, economically - Oh no, we can't have an individual with this capability.
Imagine if every school, community, individual, business and so on could have their own direct two-way satellite link what fantastic impact this would have on our economy.
There are ever increasing satellites above our skies - easily accessible with unlimited bandwidth at incredible prices.
All I want is for policy to change the license fee from R50 000.00 to R50.00.
The minister could do this with the stroke of a pen and solve many of our problems.
ASF
30-04-2004, 01:56 PM
mbs -
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I urge you all to take a more cooperative stance on the approach to our problem<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Why? Telkom are totally uncoperative towards us (the small disgruntled community!). ICASA are ineffectual and Dr Ivy - well say no more...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> - adopting an agressive attitude and personal attacks on the Minister or organised business will get us nowhere.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
This is what happens when people are ignored - and as to a personal attack - damn sure - Dr Ivy's a politician - screw up continiously and your'e going to blasted - it goes with the turf dude. Organised business - please CUASA and SAVA - what a joke! If they stopped sucking up and took a stance mabey they would command more respect.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">As I've said elsewhere in this forum, she's not the problem,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I disagree - she is..
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">nor is Government,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I disagree - they are...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The problem lies with policy execution and service delivery,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
And who is responsible for this - the above 2.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">compounded by the intricacies and complexity of the telecomms environment,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
What intricacies and complexities - it's simple - allow anyone with the bucks to buy a reasonably priced license for the services they want to provide and whammo - a deregulated market - ahhh but here's the rub isn't it - the govt and telkom corporate fat cats would loose out on their precious profits - never mind that the gain to the consumer and economy as a whole is enormous..
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">and the non-inclusive self-interest of certain players.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Who?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">- instead, our approach should be characterised by cooperation and specific focus on rectifying problems with the service, whether it be regulatory, technical, administrative, and so on.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - I disagree. What this country needs is a complete and total deregulation of the telco space. When we as consumers of services have choice we will show our co-operation the way it should be shown - by buying services from companies that we choose and that offer value...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">To my way of thinking, all problems to date can be traced back to the arrogance and actions of Telkom, and our attentions must continue to be focussed there.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - the govt and Dr. Ivy are the root cause. Telkom as a corporation are operating within their protected space - you would do the same given a similar situation.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If there is any question of underperformance, bungling, idiocy, vapid talk, useless and moronic approaches, etc., you need look no further than Telcrap.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Add to the list Govt, Dr. Ivy and ICASA...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And I say once again, I believe the way to solve the problem is to continue to make representations to Government and its Regulator, to haul them over the coals - taking it to the extreme, fire the asses of their strategic and operational decision-makers!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
So what happened to co-operation...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">There are some very influential people in the VANS and User forums, who may have the ear of Government and a direct line to the various oversight committees that affect telecomms in SA - it makes sense to rather rope them in, as opposed to being adversarial...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
When they actually make a difference - granted - until then I rate them as mutual admiration clubs sucking up to govt and Telkom...
I may not be very subtle about my views - but hey hold on a sec - yup this is a public forum - I have a constitutional right to freedom of speech and my opion is that Govt, Dr. Ivy, ICASA, Telkom and anyone who sides with them are pathetic. A totally deregulated telco space in all it's permutations would slingshot this country's economy and improve the well being of all it's citizens...
My 2c worth...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I urge you all to take a more cooperative stance on the approach to our problem<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Why? Telkom are totally uncoperative towards us (the small disgruntled community!). ICASA are ineffectual and Dr Ivy - well say no more...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> - adopting an agressive attitude and personal attacks on the Minister or organised business will get us nowhere.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
This is what happens when people are ignored - and as to a personal attack - damn sure - Dr Ivy's a politician - screw up continiously and your'e going to blasted - it goes with the turf dude. Organised business - please CUASA and SAVA - what a joke! If they stopped sucking up and took a stance mabey they would command more respect.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">As I've said elsewhere in this forum, she's not the problem,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I disagree - she is..
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">nor is Government,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I disagree - they are...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The problem lies with policy execution and service delivery,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
And who is responsible for this - the above 2.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">compounded by the intricacies and complexity of the telecomms environment,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
What intricacies and complexities - it's simple - allow anyone with the bucks to buy a reasonably priced license for the services they want to provide and whammo - a deregulated market - ahhh but here's the rub isn't it - the govt and telkom corporate fat cats would loose out on their precious profits - never mind that the gain to the consumer and economy as a whole is enormous..
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">and the non-inclusive self-interest of certain players.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Who?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">- instead, our approach should be characterised by cooperation and specific focus on rectifying problems with the service, whether it be regulatory, technical, administrative, and so on.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - I disagree. What this country needs is a complete and total deregulation of the telco space. When we as consumers of services have choice we will show our co-operation the way it should be shown - by buying services from companies that we choose and that offer value...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">To my way of thinking, all problems to date can be traced back to the arrogance and actions of Telkom, and our attentions must continue to be focussed there.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - the govt and Dr. Ivy are the root cause. Telkom as a corporation are operating within their protected space - you would do the same given a similar situation.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If there is any question of underperformance, bungling, idiocy, vapid talk, useless and moronic approaches, etc., you need look no further than Telcrap.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Add to the list Govt, Dr. Ivy and ICASA...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And I say once again, I believe the way to solve the problem is to continue to make representations to Government and its Regulator, to haul them over the coals - taking it to the extreme, fire the asses of their strategic and operational decision-makers!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
So what happened to co-operation...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">There are some very influential people in the VANS and User forums, who may have the ear of Government and a direct line to the various oversight committees that affect telecomms in SA - it makes sense to rather rope them in, as opposed to being adversarial...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
When they actually make a difference - granted - until then I rate them as mutual admiration clubs sucking up to govt and Telkom...
I may not be very subtle about my views - but hey hold on a sec - yup this is a public forum - I have a constitutional right to freedom of speech and my opion is that Govt, Dr. Ivy, ICASA, Telkom and anyone who sides with them are pathetic. A totally deregulated telco space in all it's permutations would slingshot this country's economy and improve the well being of all it's citizens...
My 2c worth...
mbs
30-04-2004, 09:23 PM
MICROFAST:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I want a two-way satellite link, the radio spectrum is proven, it is available and legal -
but "policy" prevents me from getting it.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - it's not the policy that's the stumbling block for you, it's the affordability and fee economies, by your own admission. Hoever, this particular policy addresses licensing for content providers that generate revenue, which is why the fee is so high. The way I understand it, it does not address connectivity for content consumers, which is another policy issue. Sure, I agree that every school, community, etc. must be connected, but this is precisely what ICASA must regulate, as a free-for-all will result in nothing but chaos. Consider just one aspect - about 4 years ago, there were 27148 public and independent schools in SA, with approx. 360,000 registered educators. Today, these figures are probably much higher. Obviously, the metrics demand proper management and regulation, to provide a scenario where other stakeholders are not detrimentally affected - this is clearly the Regulator's task, irrespective of how efficient or inefficient they are in task fulfilment. It's highly doubtful that allowing <i>carte blanche</i> when it comes to satellite connectivity would actually improve our connectivity situation - you'd probably find providers focussing on high-revenue areas, to the exclusion of those areas where a greater need for connectivity potentially exists...
ASF:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:I urge you all to take a more cooperative stance on the approach to our problem
<i>Why? Telkom are totally uncoperative towards us (the small disgruntled community!). ICASA are ineffectual and Dr Ivy - well say no more...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Very simply, there is no evidence that a contrary approach has worked or will work in the future - as you say, Telkom so far are uncooperative and have chosen to ignore us. On the other hand, the Regulator has so far listened to what we're saying, and has committed to taking the matter further, so there's no grounds yet for saying they're ineffectual. The problem is Telkom, who will inevitably resort to litigation and delay resolution even further - there's nothing that either the Minister or ICASA can do about that, as due process must be followed...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote: - adopting an agressive attitude and personal attacks on the Minister or organised business will get us nowhere.
<i>This is what happens when people are ignored - and as to a personal attack - damn sure - Dr Ivy's a politician - screw up continiously and your'e going to blasted - it goes with the turf dude. Organised business - please CUASA and SAVA - what a joke! If they stopped sucking up and took a stance mabey they would command more respect.</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
OK, maybe venting in this way helps you (personally, I use Rwandan coffee, as I said in a previous post elsewhere) - I still don't see how it helps MyADSL, however. I do agree that politicians are fair game, but that's exactly the point - the target should be Telkom, not the Doctor, her Regulator, nor organised business. I don't think I've got the wrong end of the stick - all our woes are caused by Telcrap (and now Sintech seem to have added to the woes of MyWireless users, through unilateral 'optimisation' without due and appropriate consideration of the connectivity of their client base)...*sigh*
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:As I've said elsewhere in this forum, she's not the problem,
<i>I disagree - she is..</i>
quote:nor is Government,
<i>I disagree - they are...</i>
quote:The problem lies with policy execution and service delivery,
<i>And who is responsible for this - the above 2.</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - that's where you have it wrong: execution and service delivery is Telkom's baby. And it is precisely this point that needs to be hammered home. Telkom's actions to date have been nothing short of an obstacle and hindrance to the promotion and development of the telecomms environment in SA, particularly when it comes to the ADSL service. This is doubly tragic when considering its public service mandate. I'm not aware of anything that deliberately constrains this on the part of Government and its Regulator, other than the inordinately long period of time taken to resolve issues. If you know of anything, please let us have some insight...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:compounded by the intricacies and complexity of the telecomms environment,
<i>What intricacies and complexities - it's simple - allow anyone with the bucks to buy a reasonably priced license for the services they want to provide and whammo - a deregulated market - ahhh but here's the rub isn't it - the govt and telkom corporate fat cats would loose out on their precious profits - never mind that the gain to the consumer and economy as a whole is enormous..</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - here again, it's not as simple as that. A completely deregulated market will probably result in chaos, due to a primary focus on revenues by prospective players. There is no guarantee that equable connectivity will result, nor that of equal opportunity, notwithstanding the mechanisms currently in place to assure this. The intricacies and complexities also include issues of technical compatibility (I recall some issues about non-compatible technologies offered by prospective bidders for cell licenses, for example) and inter-governmental committments (consider the Cahora-Bassa situation, which probably contains similar facets to that of our telecomms scenario).
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:and the non-inclusive self-interest of certain players.
<i>Who?</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Telkom and the Tintana Consortium (SBC and the Malaysian telco)
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:- instead, our approach should be characterised by cooperation and specific focus on rectifying problems with the service, whether it be regulatory, technical, administrative, and so on.
<i>Nope - I disagree. What this country needs is a complete and total deregulation of the telco space. When we as consumers of services have choice we will show our co-operation the way it should be shown - by buying services from companies that we choose and that offer value...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
See comment above about intricacies and complexities, which applies equally. Let's make no mistake about this - I am not in favour of regulation to the extent that it currently applies, nor am I in favour of total deregulation. I am, however, in favour of a considered, *partial* deregulation, particularly where this would promote measures designed to directly influence *sustainable* development of our telecomms environment. Key to this is the removal of Section 40 of the TCA, for example.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:To my way of thinking, all problems to date can be traced back to the arrogance and actions of Telkom, and our attentions must continue to be focussed there.
<i>Nope - the govt and Dr. Ivy are the root cause. Telkom as a corporation are operating within their protected space - you would do the same given a similar situation.</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
This is where we differ substantially. To my way of thinking, they are definitely operating outside their space. For example, their actions cannot be seen to be fulfilling their public service mandate - deploying exchanges and lines to unconnected areas, and then unilaterally pulling them out ostensibly on the grounds of non-payment, yet simultaneously posting obscene profits, is evidence of blatant mismanagement in this regard, in my opinion.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:If there is any question of underperformance, bungling, idiocy, vapid talk, useless and moronic approaches, etc., you need look no further than Telcrap.
<i>Add to the list Govt, Dr. Ivy and ICASA...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I said in a previous posting elsewhere that hindsight always provides perfect vision. I would hesitate to ascribe all these attributes to your additions to the list, for the simple reason that our problems are the result of Telcrap's actions, and not any other entity. As I have said previously, the one criticism I have, is that it takes *just too long* to achieve resolution - hopefully this will improve, now that there's a Deputy Minister in place. On this score, I've just read the following in the Mail and Guardian edition of April 30, which points to evidence that this fellow may be an 'Action Man' (which we sorely need):
<i>"The great unknown among the deputy ministers is the new Deputy Communictions Minister, Radhakrishna "Roy" Padayachee, who has a long-standing history in grassroots activism. He was the spokesperson for the Community Distress Committee formed after the death of 12 children in a stampede at the Throb Nightclub in 2000. He worked as director of the Early Choldhood Learning Centre. His struggle credentials date back to the Natal Indian Congress, the United Democratic Front(sic). In the early Eighties he was a key mover in the Housing Action Committee."</i>
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote : And I say once again, I believe the way to solve the problem is to continue to make representations to Government and its Regulator, to haul them over the coals - taking it to the extreme, fire the asses of their strategic and operational decision-makers!
<i>So what happened to co-operation...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
What was intended was to highlight the necessity for a cooperative approach to bring Telkom to book, which implies working with Government and its Regulator (and perhaps additionally, organised business). This did not mean cooperation with Telkom to permit their strategic and operational decision-makers to justify their actions, which clearly conflict with their public service mandate, the needs of their client base, and generally typical of an arrogant parastatal undertaking actions reminiscent to that of the state machinery pre-1994...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:There are some very influential people in the VANS and User forums, who may have the ear of Government and a direct line to the various oversight committees that affect telecomms in SA - it makes sense to rather rope them in, as opposed to being adversarial...
<i>When they actually make a difference - granted - until then I rate them as mutual admiration clubs sucking up to govt and Telkom...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Have they been given the opportunity to make a difference? Maybe CUASA and VASA should both be invited by RPM to provide input on the ADSL service and its problems [/aside - RPM please respond]. They could both publish a position paper (jointly or individually) and take a public stance on the issue. It's not correct to slag them without evidence of their standpoint, in my opinion. And in the event of their support, this could prove to be invaluable...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I may not be very subtle about my views - but hey hold on a sec - yup this is a public forum - I have a constitutional right to freedom of speech and my opion is that Govt, Dr. Ivy, ICASA, Telkom and anyone who sides with them are pathetic. A totally deregulated telco space in all it's permutations would slingshot this country's economy and improve the well being of all it's citizens...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Granted, you have the right to express your views in a public forum, as have all other MyADSL members. All I ask is that we look at cooperative, constructive approaches and mechanisms to improve the telecomms scenario in SA, which an adversarial approach will not achieve. Key to this is consumer advocacy, to the extent that it highlights the current negative aspects of the Telkom rollout, and clearly non-delivery of its public service mandate, together with proposed corrective measures properly aligned with Government's transformation agenda. As I've stated above, I have no reason to believe that total deregulation will work, nor will the current regulatory environment as it stands. After all, we should all be siding with the consumer, shouldn't we?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">My 2c worth...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Keep it coming, guys - this is healthy!!
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I want a two-way satellite link, the radio spectrum is proven, it is available and legal -
but "policy" prevents me from getting it.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - it's not the policy that's the stumbling block for you, it's the affordability and fee economies, by your own admission. Hoever, this particular policy addresses licensing for content providers that generate revenue, which is why the fee is so high. The way I understand it, it does not address connectivity for content consumers, which is another policy issue. Sure, I agree that every school, community, etc. must be connected, but this is precisely what ICASA must regulate, as a free-for-all will result in nothing but chaos. Consider just one aspect - about 4 years ago, there were 27148 public and independent schools in SA, with approx. 360,000 registered educators. Today, these figures are probably much higher. Obviously, the metrics demand proper management and regulation, to provide a scenario where other stakeholders are not detrimentally affected - this is clearly the Regulator's task, irrespective of how efficient or inefficient they are in task fulfilment. It's highly doubtful that allowing <i>carte blanche</i> when it comes to satellite connectivity would actually improve our connectivity situation - you'd probably find providers focussing on high-revenue areas, to the exclusion of those areas where a greater need for connectivity potentially exists...
ASF:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:I urge you all to take a more cooperative stance on the approach to our problem
<i>Why? Telkom are totally uncoperative towards us (the small disgruntled community!). ICASA are ineffectual and Dr Ivy - well say no more...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Very simply, there is no evidence that a contrary approach has worked or will work in the future - as you say, Telkom so far are uncooperative and have chosen to ignore us. On the other hand, the Regulator has so far listened to what we're saying, and has committed to taking the matter further, so there's no grounds yet for saying they're ineffectual. The problem is Telkom, who will inevitably resort to litigation and delay resolution even further - there's nothing that either the Minister or ICASA can do about that, as due process must be followed...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote: - adopting an agressive attitude and personal attacks on the Minister or organised business will get us nowhere.
<i>This is what happens when people are ignored - and as to a personal attack - damn sure - Dr Ivy's a politician - screw up continiously and your'e going to blasted - it goes with the turf dude. Organised business - please CUASA and SAVA - what a joke! If they stopped sucking up and took a stance mabey they would command more respect.</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
OK, maybe venting in this way helps you (personally, I use Rwandan coffee, as I said in a previous post elsewhere) - I still don't see how it helps MyADSL, however. I do agree that politicians are fair game, but that's exactly the point - the target should be Telkom, not the Doctor, her Regulator, nor organised business. I don't think I've got the wrong end of the stick - all our woes are caused by Telcrap (and now Sintech seem to have added to the woes of MyWireless users, through unilateral 'optimisation' without due and appropriate consideration of the connectivity of their client base)...*sigh*
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:As I've said elsewhere in this forum, she's not the problem,
<i>I disagree - she is..</i>
quote:nor is Government,
<i>I disagree - they are...</i>
quote:The problem lies with policy execution and service delivery,
<i>And who is responsible for this - the above 2.</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - that's where you have it wrong: execution and service delivery is Telkom's baby. And it is precisely this point that needs to be hammered home. Telkom's actions to date have been nothing short of an obstacle and hindrance to the promotion and development of the telecomms environment in SA, particularly when it comes to the ADSL service. This is doubly tragic when considering its public service mandate. I'm not aware of anything that deliberately constrains this on the part of Government and its Regulator, other than the inordinately long period of time taken to resolve issues. If you know of anything, please let us have some insight...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:compounded by the intricacies and complexity of the telecomms environment,
<i>What intricacies and complexities - it's simple - allow anyone with the bucks to buy a reasonably priced license for the services they want to provide and whammo - a deregulated market - ahhh but here's the rub isn't it - the govt and telkom corporate fat cats would loose out on their precious profits - never mind that the gain to the consumer and economy as a whole is enormous..</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nope - here again, it's not as simple as that. A completely deregulated market will probably result in chaos, due to a primary focus on revenues by prospective players. There is no guarantee that equable connectivity will result, nor that of equal opportunity, notwithstanding the mechanisms currently in place to assure this. The intricacies and complexities also include issues of technical compatibility (I recall some issues about non-compatible technologies offered by prospective bidders for cell licenses, for example) and inter-governmental committments (consider the Cahora-Bassa situation, which probably contains similar facets to that of our telecomms scenario).
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:and the non-inclusive self-interest of certain players.
<i>Who?</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Telkom and the Tintana Consortium (SBC and the Malaysian telco)
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:- instead, our approach should be characterised by cooperation and specific focus on rectifying problems with the service, whether it be regulatory, technical, administrative, and so on.
<i>Nope - I disagree. What this country needs is a complete and total deregulation of the telco space. When we as consumers of services have choice we will show our co-operation the way it should be shown - by buying services from companies that we choose and that offer value...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
See comment above about intricacies and complexities, which applies equally. Let's make no mistake about this - I am not in favour of regulation to the extent that it currently applies, nor am I in favour of total deregulation. I am, however, in favour of a considered, *partial* deregulation, particularly where this would promote measures designed to directly influence *sustainable* development of our telecomms environment. Key to this is the removal of Section 40 of the TCA, for example.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:To my way of thinking, all problems to date can be traced back to the arrogance and actions of Telkom, and our attentions must continue to be focussed there.
<i>Nope - the govt and Dr. Ivy are the root cause. Telkom as a corporation are operating within their protected space - you would do the same given a similar situation.</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
This is where we differ substantially. To my way of thinking, they are definitely operating outside their space. For example, their actions cannot be seen to be fulfilling their public service mandate - deploying exchanges and lines to unconnected areas, and then unilaterally pulling them out ostensibly on the grounds of non-payment, yet simultaneously posting obscene profits, is evidence of blatant mismanagement in this regard, in my opinion.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:If there is any question of underperformance, bungling, idiocy, vapid talk, useless and moronic approaches, etc., you need look no further than Telcrap.
<i>Add to the list Govt, Dr. Ivy and ICASA...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I said in a previous posting elsewhere that hindsight always provides perfect vision. I would hesitate to ascribe all these attributes to your additions to the list, for the simple reason that our problems are the result of Telcrap's actions, and not any other entity. As I have said previously, the one criticism I have, is that it takes *just too long* to achieve resolution - hopefully this will improve, now that there's a Deputy Minister in place. On this score, I've just read the following in the Mail and Guardian edition of April 30, which points to evidence that this fellow may be an 'Action Man' (which we sorely need):
<i>"The great unknown among the deputy ministers is the new Deputy Communictions Minister, Radhakrishna "Roy" Padayachee, who has a long-standing history in grassroots activism. He was the spokesperson for the Community Distress Committee formed after the death of 12 children in a stampede at the Throb Nightclub in 2000. He worked as director of the Early Choldhood Learning Centre. His struggle credentials date back to the Natal Indian Congress, the United Democratic Front(sic). In the early Eighties he was a key mover in the Housing Action Committee."</i>
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote : And I say once again, I believe the way to solve the problem is to continue to make representations to Government and its Regulator, to haul them over the coals - taking it to the extreme, fire the asses of their strategic and operational decision-makers!
<i>So what happened to co-operation...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
What was intended was to highlight the necessity for a cooperative approach to bring Telkom to book, which implies working with Government and its Regulator (and perhaps additionally, organised business). This did not mean cooperation with Telkom to permit their strategic and operational decision-makers to justify their actions, which clearly conflict with their public service mandate, the needs of their client base, and generally typical of an arrogant parastatal undertaking actions reminiscent to that of the state machinery pre-1994...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:There are some very influential people in the VANS and User forums, who may have the ear of Government and a direct line to the various oversight committees that affect telecomms in SA - it makes sense to rather rope them in, as opposed to being adversarial...
<i>When they actually make a difference - granted - until then I rate them as mutual admiration clubs sucking up to govt and Telkom...</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Have they been given the opportunity to make a difference? Maybe CUASA and VASA should both be invited by RPM to provide input on the ADSL service and its problems [/aside - RPM please respond]. They could both publish a position paper (jointly or individually) and take a public stance on the issue. It's not correct to slag them without evidence of their standpoint, in my opinion. And in the event of their support, this could prove to be invaluable...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I may not be very subtle about my views - but hey hold on a sec - yup this is a public forum - I have a constitutional right to freedom of speech and my opion is that Govt, Dr. Ivy, ICASA, Telkom and anyone who sides with them are pathetic. A totally deregulated telco space in all it's permutations would slingshot this country's economy and improve the well being of all it's citizens...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Granted, you have the right to express your views in a public forum, as have all other MyADSL members. All I ask is that we look at cooperative, constructive approaches and mechanisms to improve the telecomms scenario in SA, which an adversarial approach will not achieve. Key to this is consumer advocacy, to the extent that it highlights the current negative aspects of the Telkom rollout, and clearly non-delivery of its public service mandate, together with proposed corrective measures properly aligned with Government's transformation agenda. As I've stated above, I have no reason to believe that total deregulation will work, nor will the current regulatory environment as it stands. After all, we should all be siding with the consumer, shouldn't we?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">My 2c worth...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Keep it coming, guys - this is healthy!!
mithrandi
30-04-2004, 09:26 PM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What was intended was to highlight the necessity for a cooperative approach to bring Telkom to book<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Deregulate the market, and it'll all happen automatically. Economics is a beautiful thing...
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
Deregulate the market, and it'll all happen automatically. Economics is a beautiful thing...
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
mbs
30-04-2004, 09:36 PM
To take MICROFAST's scenario as a hypothetical example to build on - so how do you ensure connectivity to a rural school situated in Mier (remote Northern Cape) or in Mkuze (remote Nortern KZN), where the ROI would be non-existent? Economics can also be a bad thing, depending on the context. Hence, complete deregulation will not work - and don't tell me that those schools must remain the responsibility of Government!
mithrandi
30-04-2004, 09:47 PM
If the ROI were non-existent, then no-one would do it regardless of regulation or lack thereof. Economics again...
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
mbs
30-04-2004, 10:23 PM
Ah, but that's the point - regulation must facilitate equable rollout, to ensure connectivity for all ('digital divide', public service mandate, and all that stuff). It would not be right to exclude facilities from those places, purely because of a negative or non-existent ROI. This would be denying the potential for development, even if actual development does not occur. Hence, complete de-regulation will not work...
Karnaugh
30-04-2004, 10:49 PM
why not?
I'd start rolling out cat5 and fibre all over the place just because I can if they deregulated, what fun a 100mb switched public network would be. I agree maybe cables shouldnt be cast arround the place randomly, but I cant see how regulation aids people in evolving an idea without milions of rand on tap.
- Colin Alston
colin at alston dot za dot org
"Warning: Use with extreme caution."
I'd start rolling out cat5 and fibre all over the place just because I can if they deregulated, what fun a 100mb switched public network would be. I agree maybe cables shouldnt be cast arround the place randomly, but I cant see how regulation aids people in evolving an idea without milions of rand on tap.
- Colin Alston
colin at alston dot za dot org
"Warning: Use with extreme caution."
quik
30-04-2004, 10:52 PM
MBS...
You keep stating that deregulation would bring chaos, please expand on this as I TOTALLY disagree.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
<i>originally posted by MBS</i>
A completely deregulated market will probably result in chaos, due to a primary focus on revenues by prospective players. There is no guarantee that equable connectivity will result, nor that of equal opportunity, notwithstanding the mechanisms currently in place to assure this.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Look at all other nations where deregulation of this sector has taken place, the advancement is phenominal.
I believe market forces such as "competition" (what is that?.. For those of you who havn't heard of this phenomenon before, see definition at the end of the post [:p]) would stabilise an unbalanced market fast as consumer objection to high pricing would actually mean something, since choice would be available, thus regulating all players in the market, not allowing prospective players a primary focus on revenues.
This would result in a communications sector driven by service, pricing and performance, also shifting and spreading HUGE amounts of revenue Telkom extort to other players, keeping money in our economy and out of the pockets of international investors and the fat cats at Telkom.
I would rather take 'no guarantees' than the current situation, although looking at what happened globally is a pretty reassuring indicator for deregulation.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
<i>originally posted by MBS</i>
I'm not aware of anything that deliberately constrains this on the part of Government and its Regulator, other than the inordinately long period of time taken to resolve issues. If you know of anything, please let us have some insight...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
OMW.. what about all the legislation in place that prevents any other company than Telkom providing communications? Above that, one cannot help but feel that government is doing everything possible to delay deregulation as long as possible. Also, the SNO, if and when that ever happens, is not going to have any impact which translates into significant change and gain for the consumer, as stated elsewhere on this forum: they are simply changing the monopoly market into a oligopolistic one.
The only way this is going to happen is by opening the market to a number of competitors to break cooing and compromising with Telkom. I would even go as far as stating overseas competitors such as AT&T, Bell etc. would do wonders for our economy as they would smash prices and Crush Telkom's stronghold over the SA consumer, done with certain terms and conditions in place providing mutual benefit.
Long gone are the days of a mindset where one company tries to dominate another, as is evidenced all over the world, collaboration and mutal benefit is far more advantagous to all parties concerned, except in South-Africa of course [V]. Thanks Telkom, government.
I do however agree that government has a role to play, which could be in the form of taxation of players within a deregulated market in order to uplift the disadvantaged communities.
One final remark. This new deputy minister seems to have no experience in the ICT sector, which is very comprehensive. But of course, the SA consumer will wait in contempt while he plays catchup, which would probably take forever... sorry. I believe government needs people coming from the sector to regulate and mange it, not some clueless newbie and a technophobe.
Competition:
1. The act of competing, as for profit or a prize; rivalry.
2. <font color="red">A test of skill or ability</font id="red">; a contest: a skating competition.
3. Rivalry between <font color="red">two or MORE businesses </font id="red">striving for the same customer or market.
Where competition does not act at all there is complete monopoly. --A. T. Hadley.
<font color="green">Video didn't kill the radio star...</font id="green"> <font color="red">Telkom did</font id="red">
You keep stating that deregulation would bring chaos, please expand on this as I TOTALLY disagree.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
<i>originally posted by MBS</i>
A completely deregulated market will probably result in chaos, due to a primary focus on revenues by prospective players. There is no guarantee that equable connectivity will result, nor that of equal opportunity, notwithstanding the mechanisms currently in place to assure this.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Look at all other nations where deregulation of this sector has taken place, the advancement is phenominal.
I believe market forces such as "competition" (what is that?.. For those of you who havn't heard of this phenomenon before, see definition at the end of the post [:p]) would stabilise an unbalanced market fast as consumer objection to high pricing would actually mean something, since choice would be available, thus regulating all players in the market, not allowing prospective players a primary focus on revenues.
This would result in a communications sector driven by service, pricing and performance, also shifting and spreading HUGE amounts of revenue Telkom extort to other players, keeping money in our economy and out of the pockets of international investors and the fat cats at Telkom.
I would rather take 'no guarantees' than the current situation, although looking at what happened globally is a pretty reassuring indicator for deregulation.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
<i>originally posted by MBS</i>
I'm not aware of anything that deliberately constrains this on the part of Government and its Regulator, other than the inordinately long period of time taken to resolve issues. If you know of anything, please let us have some insight...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
OMW.. what about all the legislation in place that prevents any other company than Telkom providing communications? Above that, one cannot help but feel that government is doing everything possible to delay deregulation as long as possible. Also, the SNO, if and when that ever happens, is not going to have any impact which translates into significant change and gain for the consumer, as stated elsewhere on this forum: they are simply changing the monopoly market into a oligopolistic one.
The only way this is going to happen is by opening the market to a number of competitors to break cooing and compromising with Telkom. I would even go as far as stating overseas competitors such as AT&T, Bell etc. would do wonders for our economy as they would smash prices and Crush Telkom's stronghold over the SA consumer, done with certain terms and conditions in place providing mutual benefit.
Long gone are the days of a mindset where one company tries to dominate another, as is evidenced all over the world, collaboration and mutal benefit is far more advantagous to all parties concerned, except in South-Africa of course [V]. Thanks Telkom, government.
I do however agree that government has a role to play, which could be in the form of taxation of players within a deregulated market in order to uplift the disadvantaged communities.
One final remark. This new deputy minister seems to have no experience in the ICT sector, which is very comprehensive. But of course, the SA consumer will wait in contempt while he plays catchup, which would probably take forever... sorry. I believe government needs people coming from the sector to regulate and mange it, not some clueless newbie and a technophobe.
Competition:
1. The act of competing, as for profit or a prize; rivalry.
2. <font color="red">A test of skill or ability</font id="red">; a contest: a skating competition.
3. Rivalry between <font color="red">two or MORE businesses </font id="red">striving for the same customer or market.
Where competition does not act at all there is complete monopoly. --A. T. Hadley.
<font color="green">Video didn't kill the radio star...</font id="green"> <font color="red">Telkom did</font id="red">
mithrandi
30-04-2004, 11:02 PM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I believe market forces<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Don't believe it, market forces are just an illusionary tool of the evil capitalists used to attack our great communist leaders!
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
Don't believe it, market forces are just an illusionary tool of the evil capitalists used to attack our great communist leaders!
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
microfast
01-05-2004, 01:09 AM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mbs</i>
<font color="blue">Nope - it's not the policy that's the stumbling block for you, it's the affordability and fee economies, by your own admission.</font id="blue"><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I'm afraid mbs you have it completely wrong.
"POLICY" does not permit 2-way sat com to be realised as affordable.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
<font color="blue">However, this particular policy addresses licensing for content providers that generate revenue, which is why the fee is so high.</font id="blue"><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
With all respect - this policy logic is flawed and the core of the problem.
It is after all a POLICY PROBLEM.
I am surprised to you cannot see it.
<font color="blue">Nope - it's not the policy that's the stumbling block for you, it's the affordability and fee economies, by your own admission.</font id="blue"><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I'm afraid mbs you have it completely wrong.
"POLICY" does not permit 2-way sat com to be realised as affordable.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
<font color="blue">However, this particular policy addresses licensing for content providers that generate revenue, which is why the fee is so high.</font id="blue"><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
With all respect - this policy logic is flawed and the core of the problem.
It is after all a POLICY PROBLEM.
I am surprised to you cannot see it.
quik
01-05-2004, 01:54 AM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mithrandi</i>
Don't believe it, market forces are just an illusionary tool of the evil capitalists used to attack our great communist leaders!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
lol... yeah, however would they function without their claws strangling whatever they cannot control/profit from?
some humour is definately required[:D]
<font color="green">Video didn't kill the radio star...</font id="green"> <font color="red">Telkom did</font id="red">
Don't believe it, market forces are just an illusionary tool of the evil capitalists used to attack our great communist leaders!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
lol... yeah, however would they function without their claws strangling whatever they cannot control/profit from?
some humour is definately required[:D]
<font color="green">Video didn't kill the radio star...</font id="green"> <font color="red">Telkom did</font id="red">
mbs
01-05-2004, 02:45 AM
KARNAUGH:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">why not?
I'd start rolling out cat5 and fibre all over the place just because I can if they deregulated, what fun a 100mb switched public network would be. I agree maybe cables shouldnt be cast arround the place randomly, but I cant see how regulation aids people in evolving an idea without milions of rand on tap.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Of course, it goes without saying that the regulatory environment cannot be designed to stifle innovation. By the same token, it must prevent exclusivity caused by income disparities - would you rollout to a school where the kids have to sit under a tree, instead of in a classroom? That's why complete deregulation will not work, and that's the quandary faced by Government - they're accused of stifling innovation and competition by providing temporary delivery protection to Telkom, at the same time charging them with their public service mandate, to ensure connectivity for unserviced areas during their period of protected service delivery. We all know of their failure to date...
QUIK:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">You keep stating that deregulation would bring chaos, please expand on this as I TOTALLY disagree.
<i> quote:
originally posted by MBS
A completely deregulated market will probably result in chaos, due to a primary focus on revenues by prospective players. There is no guarantee that equable connectivity will result, nor that of equal opportunity, notwithstanding the mechanisms currently in place to assure this.</i>
Look at all other nations where deregulation of this sector has taken place, the advancement is phenominal.
I believe market forces such as "competition" (what is that?.. For those of you who havn't heard of this phenomenon before, see definition at the end of the post ) would stabilise an unbalanced market fast as consumer objection to high pricing would actually mean something, since choice would be available, thus regulating all players in the market, not allowing prospective players a primary focus on revenues.
This would result in a communications sector driven by service, pricing and performance, also shifting and spreading HUGE amounts of revenue Telkom extort to other players, keeping money in our economy and out of the pockets of international investors and the fat cats at Telkom.
I would rather take 'no guarantees' than the current situation, although looking at what happened globally is a pretty reassuring indicator for deregulation.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Complete deregulation implies that market forces would instead be allowed to regulate, through the dynamics of competition and supply/demand. Therein lies the problem - issues of affordability will deny choice, nor can supply be guaranteed where there is no ROI. Once again, this is the quandary faced by Government - how to ensure nationwide coverage and an equable distribution of services, which deregulation will not necessarily satisfy. This is why I'm in favour of *partial* regulation - for example, should prospective providers rollout services, *but* coupled to an assured mechanism to ensure rollout in unserviced areas, this would go a long way towards rectifying the situation (see my postings elsewhere, about auditability of services, profit utilisation, governance review, etc.). I just can't see a profit-driven enterprise providing services where there are no apparent margins to be made - this would be contrary to their <i>raison d'etre</i>. On the other hand, if you provide the opportunity for profits coupled to public service offsets, you should have a win-win situation. The public service offsets would demand regulatory provisions. Unfortunately, I don't have any insight into how this was tackled in other countries, so can't really comment on their successes or failures - I'd have to do some research. I do know that the DoC and the Ministry conduct extensive and continuing research into all these issues, so they would be guided accordingly by the experiences of others...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i> quote:
originally posted by MBS
I'm not aware of anything that deliberately constrains this on the part of Government and its Regulator, other than the inordinately long period of time taken to resolve issues. If you know of anything, please let us have some insight...</i>
OMW.. what about all the legislation in place that prevents any other company than Telkom providing communications? Above that, one cannot help but feel that government is doing everything possible to delay deregulation as long as possible. Also, the SNO, if and when that ever happens, is not going to have any impact which translates into significant change and gain for the consumer, as stated elsewhere on this forum: they are simply changing the monopoly market into a oligopolistic one.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
You're referring to Section 40 of the TCA - as I've already said elsewhere, I agree that this should've been removed a long time ago. This doesn't mean that Government do not intend to remove it - it should happen shortly, as it's continued inclusion on the statute books just doesn't make sense. My criticism centres around just how long its taking to get rid of it - it's now almost 2 years later! Regarding the SNO (when it eventually becomes an operating reality), even if there is collusion and price-fixing, it would clearly still be a better situation than we have now. The problem with the SNO is as I've stated elsewhere - expectations were raised at the time of this announcement, and nobody foresaw the collapse of the global telco investment market. The SNO announcement was premised on the basis of continued high interest in telco investment, motivated among other things by false-value purchases of licenses. I think Government and its Regulator acted appropriately in being ultra-cautious about the issuing of a license - witness the catfight currently going on between minor shareholders. The tragedy is the fight is about the question of control of the SNO - what about their supposed committment and eagerness to provide a service to the public at large?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The only way this is going to happen is by opening the market to a number of competitors to break cooing and compromising with Telkom. I would even go as far as stating overseas competitors such as AT&T, Bell etc. would do wonders for our economy as they would smash prices and Crush Telkom's stronghold over the SA consumer, done with certain terms and conditions in place providing mutual benefit.
Long gone are the days of a mindset where one company tries to dominate another, as is evidenced all over the world, collaboration and mutal benefit is far more advantagous to all parties concerned, except in South-Africa of course . Thanks Telkom, government.
I do however agree that government has a role to play, which could be in the form of taxation of players within a deregulated market in order to uplift the disadvantaged communities.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Now you're talking my language! This is actually partial regulation - taxation implies statutory and regulatory provisions, with the objective of 'mutual benefit', as you call it. This is the same thing as the public service offsets I've referred to earlier, though the mechanisms may be different. Interesting that you should mention AT&T - they were the ones who lodged a complaint in that extract I posted earlier elsewhere, saying that Government were not complying with WTO agreements. Moral of the story is that we *must* be careful of external investors, notwithstanding their ability to rattle Telkrap. Our current experiences with Tintana provides evidentiary support for this...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">One final remark. This new deputy minister seems to have no experience in the ICT sector, which is very comprehensive. But of course, the SA consumer will wait in contempt while he plays catchup, which would probably take forever... sorry. I believe government needs people coming from the sector to regulate and mange it, not some clueless newbie and a technophobe.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Agreed. But we should give him a chance - he does seem to be an 'Action Man'. All we need do is look at Trevor Manual's performance - if I recall correctly, he grew up in the UDF as well (like Padayachee), and had nothing more than a Nat.Dipl.in Building Construction or something, when he started. Someone said to me a while ago that he still likes to refer to himself as being a 'qualifed bricklayer' - dunno if this is true, or whether he indulges in understated modesty, but there you have it...
MTHRANDI:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:I believe market forces
Don't believe it, market forces are just an illusionary tool of the evil capitalists used to attack our great communist leaders!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Heehee - you sayin' I'm a communist or an evil capitalist? Careful, I'll send Joe McCarthy after you (rumba.co.za) - or maybe Al'Quaeda! Death to all capitalists, communists, democrats, socialists, liberals, politicians of any persuasion, telcos, governments, consumers, advantaged and diadvantaged communities - long live me and only me!! Viva Me - aluta continua! (Allow me some latitude to occasionally indulge in idiot-speak, heh?!)
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">why not?
I'd start rolling out cat5 and fibre all over the place just because I can if they deregulated, what fun a 100mb switched public network would be. I agree maybe cables shouldnt be cast arround the place randomly, but I cant see how regulation aids people in evolving an idea without milions of rand on tap.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Of course, it goes without saying that the regulatory environment cannot be designed to stifle innovation. By the same token, it must prevent exclusivity caused by income disparities - would you rollout to a school where the kids have to sit under a tree, instead of in a classroom? That's why complete deregulation will not work, and that's the quandary faced by Government - they're accused of stifling innovation and competition by providing temporary delivery protection to Telkom, at the same time charging them with their public service mandate, to ensure connectivity for unserviced areas during their period of protected service delivery. We all know of their failure to date...
QUIK:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">You keep stating that deregulation would bring chaos, please expand on this as I TOTALLY disagree.
<i> quote:
originally posted by MBS
A completely deregulated market will probably result in chaos, due to a primary focus on revenues by prospective players. There is no guarantee that equable connectivity will result, nor that of equal opportunity, notwithstanding the mechanisms currently in place to assure this.</i>
Look at all other nations where deregulation of this sector has taken place, the advancement is phenominal.
I believe market forces such as "competition" (what is that?.. For those of you who havn't heard of this phenomenon before, see definition at the end of the post ) would stabilise an unbalanced market fast as consumer objection to high pricing would actually mean something, since choice would be available, thus regulating all players in the market, not allowing prospective players a primary focus on revenues.
This would result in a communications sector driven by service, pricing and performance, also shifting and spreading HUGE amounts of revenue Telkom extort to other players, keeping money in our economy and out of the pockets of international investors and the fat cats at Telkom.
I would rather take 'no guarantees' than the current situation, although looking at what happened globally is a pretty reassuring indicator for deregulation.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Complete deregulation implies that market forces would instead be allowed to regulate, through the dynamics of competition and supply/demand. Therein lies the problem - issues of affordability will deny choice, nor can supply be guaranteed where there is no ROI. Once again, this is the quandary faced by Government - how to ensure nationwide coverage and an equable distribution of services, which deregulation will not necessarily satisfy. This is why I'm in favour of *partial* regulation - for example, should prospective providers rollout services, *but* coupled to an assured mechanism to ensure rollout in unserviced areas, this would go a long way towards rectifying the situation (see my postings elsewhere, about auditability of services, profit utilisation, governance review, etc.). I just can't see a profit-driven enterprise providing services where there are no apparent margins to be made - this would be contrary to their <i>raison d'etre</i>. On the other hand, if you provide the opportunity for profits coupled to public service offsets, you should have a win-win situation. The public service offsets would demand regulatory provisions. Unfortunately, I don't have any insight into how this was tackled in other countries, so can't really comment on their successes or failures - I'd have to do some research. I do know that the DoC and the Ministry conduct extensive and continuing research into all these issues, so they would be guided accordingly by the experiences of others...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i> quote:
originally posted by MBS
I'm not aware of anything that deliberately constrains this on the part of Government and its Regulator, other than the inordinately long period of time taken to resolve issues. If you know of anything, please let us have some insight...</i>
OMW.. what about all the legislation in place that prevents any other company than Telkom providing communications? Above that, one cannot help but feel that government is doing everything possible to delay deregulation as long as possible. Also, the SNO, if and when that ever happens, is not going to have any impact which translates into significant change and gain for the consumer, as stated elsewhere on this forum: they are simply changing the monopoly market into a oligopolistic one.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
You're referring to Section 40 of the TCA - as I've already said elsewhere, I agree that this should've been removed a long time ago. This doesn't mean that Government do not intend to remove it - it should happen shortly, as it's continued inclusion on the statute books just doesn't make sense. My criticism centres around just how long its taking to get rid of it - it's now almost 2 years later! Regarding the SNO (when it eventually becomes an operating reality), even if there is collusion and price-fixing, it would clearly still be a better situation than we have now. The problem with the SNO is as I've stated elsewhere - expectations were raised at the time of this announcement, and nobody foresaw the collapse of the global telco investment market. The SNO announcement was premised on the basis of continued high interest in telco investment, motivated among other things by false-value purchases of licenses. I think Government and its Regulator acted appropriately in being ultra-cautious about the issuing of a license - witness the catfight currently going on between minor shareholders. The tragedy is the fight is about the question of control of the SNO - what about their supposed committment and eagerness to provide a service to the public at large?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The only way this is going to happen is by opening the market to a number of competitors to break cooing and compromising with Telkom. I would even go as far as stating overseas competitors such as AT&T, Bell etc. would do wonders for our economy as they would smash prices and Crush Telkom's stronghold over the SA consumer, done with certain terms and conditions in place providing mutual benefit.
Long gone are the days of a mindset where one company tries to dominate another, as is evidenced all over the world, collaboration and mutal benefit is far more advantagous to all parties concerned, except in South-Africa of course . Thanks Telkom, government.
I do however agree that government has a role to play, which could be in the form of taxation of players within a deregulated market in order to uplift the disadvantaged communities.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Now you're talking my language! This is actually partial regulation - taxation implies statutory and regulatory provisions, with the objective of 'mutual benefit', as you call it. This is the same thing as the public service offsets I've referred to earlier, though the mechanisms may be different. Interesting that you should mention AT&T - they were the ones who lodged a complaint in that extract I posted earlier elsewhere, saying that Government were not complying with WTO agreements. Moral of the story is that we *must* be careful of external investors, notwithstanding their ability to rattle Telkrap. Our current experiences with Tintana provides evidentiary support for this...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">One final remark. This new deputy minister seems to have no experience in the ICT sector, which is very comprehensive. But of course, the SA consumer will wait in contempt while he plays catchup, which would probably take forever... sorry. I believe government needs people coming from the sector to regulate and mange it, not some clueless newbie and a technophobe.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Agreed. But we should give him a chance - he does seem to be an 'Action Man'. All we need do is look at Trevor Manual's performance - if I recall correctly, he grew up in the UDF as well (like Padayachee), and had nothing more than a Nat.Dipl.in Building Construction or something, when he started. Someone said to me a while ago that he still likes to refer to himself as being a 'qualifed bricklayer' - dunno if this is true, or whether he indulges in understated modesty, but there you have it...
MTHRANDI:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:I believe market forces
Don't believe it, market forces are just an illusionary tool of the evil capitalists used to attack our great communist leaders!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Heehee - you sayin' I'm a communist or an evil capitalist? Careful, I'll send Joe McCarthy after you (rumba.co.za) - or maybe Al'Quaeda! Death to all capitalists, communists, democrats, socialists, liberals, politicians of any persuasion, telcos, governments, consumers, advantaged and diadvantaged communities - long live me and only me!! Viva Me - aluta continua! (Allow me some latitude to occasionally indulge in idiot-speak, heh?!)
mbs
01-05-2004, 03:03 AM
MICROFAST:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:Originally posted by mbs
<i> Nope - it's not the policy that's the stumbling block for you, it's the affordability and fee economies, by your own admission.</i>
I'm afraid mbs you have it completely wrong.
"POLICY" does not permit 2-way sat com to be realised as affordable.
<i> However, this particular policy addresses licensing for content providers that generate revenue, which is why the fee is so high.</i>
With all respect - this policy logic is flawed and the core of the problem.
It is after all a POLICY PROBLEM.
I am surprised to you cannot see it<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
OK, I hear what you're saying - you see the R50K fee as unreasonable and unwarranted, and that because this is esconced in ICASA's tariff structures, this is a 'policy'. Why not then make representations to ICASA for suitable reduction, complete with your motivation for acquiring a license, and see what they say? Like I said, the fee was based on content providers generating revenues - if you're going to generate revenue, you're a content provider according to this definition, and will have to pay something. Perhaps the trick would be to motivate your fee reduction submission with a clear sustainable development objective, whether it be skills, infrastructure rollout, 'bridging the digital divide', whatever...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> quote:Originally posted by mbs
<i> Nope - it's not the policy that's the stumbling block for you, it's the affordability and fee economies, by your own admission.</i>
I'm afraid mbs you have it completely wrong.
"POLICY" does not permit 2-way sat com to be realised as affordable.
<i> However, this particular policy addresses licensing for content providers that generate revenue, which is why the fee is so high.</i>
With all respect - this policy logic is flawed and the core of the problem.
It is after all a POLICY PROBLEM.
I am surprised to you cannot see it<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
OK, I hear what you're saying - you see the R50K fee as unreasonable and unwarranted, and that because this is esconced in ICASA's tariff structures, this is a 'policy'. Why not then make representations to ICASA for suitable reduction, complete with your motivation for acquiring a license, and see what they say? Like I said, the fee was based on content providers generating revenues - if you're going to generate revenue, you're a content provider according to this definition, and will have to pay something. Perhaps the trick would be to motivate your fee reduction submission with a clear sustainable development objective, whether it be skills, infrastructure rollout, 'bridging the digital divide', whatever...
microfast
01-05-2004, 10:12 AM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mbs</i>
.... Like I said, the fee was based on content providers generating revenues - if you're going to generate revenue, you're a content provider according to this definition, and will have to pay something...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Actually, this is not correct either ....
All embassies have their own direct two-way satellite link and they are certainly not content providers, but they must also pay the annual license fee to ICASA.
I contacted ICASA last year some time and concluded that any submissions would be useless.
ICASA, Telkom, government, Sentech and the whole kabangshootlot who make policy are motivated by their own greed and self-interests and until this problem is resolved by law and regulation I am afraid we will go nowhere in this country.
A second example - in layman's terms.
I cannot connect any communication cable to my neighbour.
I can speak to my neighbour, give him a data disk / CD / DVD.
Once again this is policy that stands in the way.
Change the policy FIRST and then the likes of Telkom will be far less of a PROBLEM to this country.
.... Like I said, the fee was based on content providers generating revenues - if you're going to generate revenue, you're a content provider according to this definition, and will have to pay something...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Actually, this is not correct either ....
All embassies have their own direct two-way satellite link and they are certainly not content providers, but they must also pay the annual license fee to ICASA.
I contacted ICASA last year some time and concluded that any submissions would be useless.
ICASA, Telkom, government, Sentech and the whole kabangshootlot who make policy are motivated by their own greed and self-interests and until this problem is resolved by law and regulation I am afraid we will go nowhere in this country.
A second example - in layman's terms.
I cannot connect any communication cable to my neighbour.
I can speak to my neighbour, give him a data disk / CD / DVD.
Once again this is policy that stands in the way.
Change the policy FIRST and then the likes of Telkom will be far less of a PROBLEM to this country.
mbs
01-05-2004, 10:48 AM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">All embassies have their own direct two-way satellite link and they are certainly not content providers, but they must also pay the annual license fee to ICASA.
I contacted ICASA last year some time and concluded that any submissions would be useless.
ICASA, Telkom, government, Sentech and the whole kabangshootlot who make policy are motivated by their own greed and self-interests and until this problem is resolved by law and regulation I am afraid we will go nowhere in this country.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
When it comes to embassies, I have no qualms about making them pay - we should up the fees even more! Be all that as it may, this is interesting - wonder if ICASA have a sliding scale of sorts, depending on usage? For example, all the IEC links that were used in past elections - were these subject to license, and at what fee? Anybody have any insight into ICASA licensing and fee arrangements for the various sat users?
Another interesting point - the R50K mentioned by MICROFAST equates to just over R4K/month, which is slightly less than a Diginet 64Kbps line. Wonder if there is some relation between these charges (collusion of sorts)?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
A second example - in layman's terms.
I cannot connect any communication cable to my neighbour.
I can speak to my neighbour, give him a data disk / CD / DVD.
Once again this is policy that stands in the way.
Change the policy FIRST and then the likes of Telkom will be far less of a PROBLEM to this country.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Agreed - this is stoopidity of the first order. Not sure if this is a Section 40 provision (I can't check it out now - have to take me dear ol' mom to the doctor), but by the same token, some sort of regulation is probably warranted here, whether it be via local municipal bye-laws, town planning regulations, or similar, to maintain some sort of order. Otherwise we'd have the chaos found in 'informal settlements'. And it's not only the residents to blame - have you seen the mess caused by the Eskom's electrification of previously unserviced areas, with power cables festooned from poles all over the place? No wonder they've had to embark on a stupid TV campaign to try and stop people connecting illegally...
I contacted ICASA last year some time and concluded that any submissions would be useless.
ICASA, Telkom, government, Sentech and the whole kabangshootlot who make policy are motivated by their own greed and self-interests and until this problem is resolved by law and regulation I am afraid we will go nowhere in this country.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
When it comes to embassies, I have no qualms about making them pay - we should up the fees even more! Be all that as it may, this is interesting - wonder if ICASA have a sliding scale of sorts, depending on usage? For example, all the IEC links that were used in past elections - were these subject to license, and at what fee? Anybody have any insight into ICASA licensing and fee arrangements for the various sat users?
Another interesting point - the R50K mentioned by MICROFAST equates to just over R4K/month, which is slightly less than a Diginet 64Kbps line. Wonder if there is some relation between these charges (collusion of sorts)?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
A second example - in layman's terms.
I cannot connect any communication cable to my neighbour.
I can speak to my neighbour, give him a data disk / CD / DVD.
Once again this is policy that stands in the way.
Change the policy FIRST and then the likes of Telkom will be far less of a PROBLEM to this country.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Agreed - this is stoopidity of the first order. Not sure if this is a Section 40 provision (I can't check it out now - have to take me dear ol' mom to the doctor), but by the same token, some sort of regulation is probably warranted here, whether it be via local municipal bye-laws, town planning regulations, or similar, to maintain some sort of order. Otherwise we'd have the chaos found in 'informal settlements'. And it's not only the residents to blame - have you seen the mess caused by the Eskom's electrification of previously unserviced areas, with power cables festooned from poles all over the place? No wonder they've had to embark on a stupid TV campaign to try and stop people connecting illegally...
mbs
01-05-2004, 12:53 PM
OK - I'm back. I've checked and it's actually Section 41 of the TCA that prevents neighbour-to-neighbour connections. The other thing of note is that education and transport aspects are not constrained - some freedom of service is provided to meet perceived development and societal objectives, like learning and skills transfer, safety and maritime rescue, etc. It seems that some thought has been given to the matter, though obviously not enough. Methinks it would be a good idea to rope in the Trade and Industry people, who would have an interest in the promotion of same through telecomms - it's not only Transport and Education that have societal development objectives to meet. In point of fact, Trade and Industry have a <u>direct</u> interest, whereas the other two have an indirect interest...
On another sub-topic - a question to RPM: I'd be interested in seeing how many people subscribe to my view of partial regulation being the way to go, as opposed to those who agree with the current regulatory environment, or those who believe that complete de-regulation is the way to go, leaving competition to sort it out. Could you run a poll on this? I'm sure others would be interested in the results too - it would be an indicator of sorts as to the influence of the garbage spewed out by American-influenced business schools, for example...
Would also appreciate your input regarding CUASA and VASA and whether it would be useful to approach them to take a position on the ADSL service (see /aside in previous posting in this topic) - thanx...
On another sub-topic - a question to RPM: I'd be interested in seeing how many people subscribe to my view of partial regulation being the way to go, as opposed to those who agree with the current regulatory environment, or those who believe that complete de-regulation is the way to go, leaving competition to sort it out. Could you run a poll on this? I'm sure others would be interested in the results too - it would be an indicator of sorts as to the influence of the garbage spewed out by American-influenced business schools, for example...
Would also appreciate your input regarding CUASA and VASA and whether it would be useful to approach them to take a position on the ADSL service (see /aside in previous posting in this topic) - thanx...
Peapod
10-05-2004, 02:45 PM
Hi Guys.
Dr Ivy has a saint in her ministry, one Mr Pongwana (who was acting DG but now i think is permanentlyin the position) who is her right and left hand man. He is calm, approachable, dignified, highly educated and astute and is with her wherever she goes. In my experience, it isnt the minister who gets things done, but the first class people within the ministry who really genuinely do want to move things forward. A gentler approach is in order. Mr Pongwana takes meetings from the public, they take a while to organise, but they do happen eventually.
Dr Ivy has a saint in her ministry, one Mr Pongwana (who was acting DG but now i think is permanentlyin the position) who is her right and left hand man. He is calm, approachable, dignified, highly educated and astute and is with her wherever she goes. In my experience, it isnt the minister who gets things done, but the first class people within the ministry who really genuinely do want to move things forward. A gentler approach is in order. Mr Pongwana takes meetings from the public, they take a while to organise, but they do happen eventually.
quik
10-05-2004, 10:34 PM
Hi Peapod..
His expertise doesn't seem to lie in the ICT sector though. Do you have any good sources of background and more info on said politician?
<font color="blue">TRUTH does <u>not</u> <i>lie</i> in <font color="green">opinions</font id="green"> and <font color="green">perception</font id="green">... but in that which <i>conforms</i> to <font color="red">fact</font id="red"> and <font color="red">reality</font id="red"></font id="blue">
His expertise doesn't seem to lie in the ICT sector though. Do you have any good sources of background and more info on said politician?
<font color="blue">TRUTH does <u>not</u> <i>lie</i> in <font color="green">opinions</font id="green"> and <font color="green">perception</font id="green">... but in that which <i>conforms</i> to <font color="red">fact</font id="red"> and <font color="red">reality</font id="red"></font id="blue">
mbs
10-05-2004, 10:59 PM
Yep, agree with PEAPOD. This is exactly as I've attempted to project on previous posts - I like PEAPOD's turn of phrase: "A gentler approach is in order".
For QUIK - there is a clear difference between a civil servant and a politician. Make no mistake, everybody has a political standpoint of sorts, irrespective of whether based on sound or unsound principles. However, those appointed as DGs, CDs, ADs, whatever, are actually civil servants. Their first priority is to undertake service delivery, which must be assured within Government policy frameworks. Yes, they have input into said frameworks, but that which becomes a regulatory provision or which is included in the statutes, is the resultant of a long, drawn-out consultative process.
Anyway, it's heartening to hear that Mr Pongwana is amenable to representations from the 'great unwashed' - I sincerely hope that he defers to those in the know regarding technical issues (particularly regarding the ADSL service, and then not just Telkrap strategic management/operational decision-makers). I also hope he considers appropriately the cross-cutting aspects of DOC's activities, and not only via their cluster - as I've said in a previous posting, the imperatives of DPSA, DPW, DOL, DOE, etc., are all influenced by the machinations of the DOC...
For QUIK - there is a clear difference between a civil servant and a politician. Make no mistake, everybody has a political standpoint of sorts, irrespective of whether based on sound or unsound principles. However, those appointed as DGs, CDs, ADs, whatever, are actually civil servants. Their first priority is to undertake service delivery, which must be assured within Government policy frameworks. Yes, they have input into said frameworks, but that which becomes a regulatory provision or which is included in the statutes, is the resultant of a long, drawn-out consultative process.
Anyway, it's heartening to hear that Mr Pongwana is amenable to representations from the 'great unwashed' - I sincerely hope that he defers to those in the know regarding technical issues (particularly regarding the ADSL service, and then not just Telkrap strategic management/operational decision-makers). I also hope he considers appropriately the cross-cutting aspects of DOC's activities, and not only via their cluster - as I've said in a previous posting, the imperatives of DPSA, DPW, DOL, DOE, etc., are all influenced by the machinations of the DOC...
Webdude
16-07-2004, 06:09 PM
This is why Telkom has launch Wavestream or whatever it is called it is basically VSAT with limited cap. dereulation is neccessary and a move to a nationally networked/internet country is needed to develop people/cultures/schools etc... but we are blocked by Telkom and their mate ICASA.... basically SA is the most expensive bandwidth country in the world excluding our screwed up african neighbours. ADSL is a start but WISPs are the way to go.